Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, Figs 1-13, Claims 1-8, 10, 14-20 in the reply filed on 10/8/2025 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea on 7/8/2022.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the outer pattern comprises a plurality of outer patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction, and a second direction crossing the first direction; and the inner pattern comprises a plurality of inner patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction and the second direction of claims 6, 19 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-8, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 6 is at odds with claim 1 since claim 1 requires “the at least one groove extending across an entire length of the support member in the first direction”, while claim 6 requires “the outer pattern comprises a plurality of outer patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction, and a second direction crossing the first direction; and the inner pattern comprises a plurality of inner patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction and the second direction”. The patterns cannot be adjacent along the first direction if the grooves extend across an entire length in the first direction.
Claim 19 has a similar situation.
Claims 7-8, 20 are rejected for depending upon an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liao (US 20220103670 A1, hereinafter Liao)
Claim 1. Liao teaches a support member (2, fig 3d) for a display device, comprising:
a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other (fig 4c);
an outer pattern at the first surface, and extending longer in a first direction; and an inner pattern at the second surface, and extending longer in the first direction, wherein the outer pattern and the inner pattern are staggered with each other (fig 4c), and
wherein at least one of the outer pattern or the inner pattern comprises at least one groove (fig 3d) recessed from a corresponding one of the first surface or the second surface (fig 3d), the at least one groove extending across an entire length of the support member in the first direction (fig 3d).
Claim 2. Liao teaches the support member of claim 1, wherein:
the support member comprises a first area, a second area, and a third area between the first area and the second area in a plan view (fig 3d);
the support member is configured to be folded along a folding axis parallel to the first direction in the third area (fig 3d); and
the outer pattern and the inner pattern are located in the third area (fig 3d).
Claim 3. Liao teaches the support member of claim 2, wherein in a state in which the support member is folded, the first surface faces toward the outside, and the second surface faces toward the inside (fig 4c indicates folding in both directions).
Claim 5. Liao teaches the support member of claim 2, wherein the outer pattern and the inner pattern have a bar shape or a rhombus shape in a plan view (fig 3d, 4c).
Claim 6. Liao teaches the support member of claim 2, wherein:
the outer pattern comprises a plurality of outer patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction, and a second direction crossing the first direction (fig 4c); and
the inner pattern comprises a plurality of inner patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction and the second direction (fig 4c).
Claim 7. Liao teaches the support member of claim 6, further comprising:
an outer bridge between the plurality of the outer patterns (fig 4c); and
an inner bridge between the plurality of the inner patterns (fig 4c).
PNG
media_image1.png
1231
1913
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 8. Liao teaches the support member of claim 7, wherein the outer bridge and the inner bridge are located in a zigzag shape (see annotated fig 4c).
Claim 14. Liao teaches a display device comprising:
a display panel (1, fig 2a) configured to display an image; and
a support member (2) on one surface of the display panel, wherein the support member comprises:
a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other (fig 4c);
an outer pattern (fig 4c) at the first surface, and extending longer in a first direction (fig 4c); and
an inner pattern (fig 4c) at the second surface, and extending longer in the first direction (fig 4c),
wherein the outer pattern and the inner pattern are staggered with each other (fig 4c), and wherein at least one of the outer pattern or the inner pattern comprises at least one groove (fig 4c) recessed from a corresponding one of the first surface or the second surface (fig 4c), the at least one groove extending across an entire length of the support member in the first direction (fig 3d).
Claim 15. Liao teaches the display device of claim 14, wherein:
the support member comprises a first area, a second area, and a third area between the first area and the second area in a plan view (fig 3d);
the support member is configured to be folded along a folding axis parallel to the first direction in the third area (fig 3d); and
the outer pattern and the inner pattern are located in the third area (fig 4c).
Claim 16. Liao teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein in a state in which the support member is folded, the first surface faces toward the outside, and the second surface faces toward the inside (fig 4c).
Claim 18. Liao teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein the outer pattern and the inner pattern have a bar shape or a rhombus shape in a plan view (figs 3d, 4c, 4d).
Claim 19. Liao teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein:
the outer pattern comprises a plurality of outer patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction, and a second direction crossing the first direction (fig 4c); and
the inner pattern comprises a plurality of inner patterns adjacent to one another along the first direction and the second direction (fig 4c).
Claim 20. Liao teaches the display device of claim 19, wherein the support member comprises:
an outer bridge between the plurality of outer patterns (fig 4c); and
an inner bridge between the plurality of inner patterns (fig 4c), and
wherein the outer bridge and the inner bridge are located in a zigzag shape, or along a line (see annotated fig 4c below).
PNG
media_image1.png
1231
1913
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao fig 4c in view of Liao fig 4d
Claim 4. Liao teaches the support member of claim 2, wherein:
the outer pattern comprises the at least one groove recessed from the first surface of the support member (fig 4c);
the inner pattern comprises the at least one groove recessed from the second surface of the support member (fig 4c); and
However Liao fig 4c fails to specifically teach a hole penetrating the support member is located in a portion in which the outer pattern and the inner pattern overlap with each other
Liao fig 4d teaches a hole penetrating the support member is located in a portion in which the outer pattern and the inner pattern overlap with each other (fig 4d, [0107])
a hole penetrating the support member is located in a portion in which the outer pattern and the inner pattern overlap with each other (fig 4d, [0107]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the arrangement as taught by Liao fig 4d into the device of Liao fig 4c. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Liao fig 4c in the above manner for the purpose of absorbing stress and improving mechanical strength (Liao [0108] recites ‘In this design, because the gap 3 passes through the two opposite primary surfaces a.sub.1 and a.sub.2 of the support sheet 2, a capability of the gap 3 to absorb stress generated when the bendable area is bent is higher, which can more effectively ensure that the bending activity of the bendable area is not limited. In addition, the non-gap area 4 in the bendable area has a specific thickness. This helps improve mechanical strength of the bendable area.’).
Claim 17. Liao teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein:
the outer pattern comprises the at least one groove recessed from the first surface of the support member (fig 4c);
the inner pattern comprises the at least one groove recessed from the second surface of the support member (fig 4c); and
However Liao fig 4c fails to specifically teach a hole penetrating the support member is located in a portion in which the outer pattern and the inner pattern overlap with each other
Liao fig 4d teaches a hole penetrating the support member is located in a portion in which the outer pattern and the inner pattern overlap with each other (fig 4d, [0107])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the arrangement as taught by Liao fig 4d into the device of Liao fig 4c. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Liao fig 4c in the above manner for the purpose of absorbing stress and improving mechanical strength (Liao [0108] recites ‘In this design, because the gap 3 passes through the two opposite primary surfaces a.sub.1 and a.sub.2 of the support sheet 2, a capability of the gap 3 to absorb stress generated when the bendable area is bent is higher, which can more effectively ensure that the bending activity of the bendable area is not limited. In addition, the non-gap area 4 in the bendable area has a specific thickness. This helps improve mechanical strength of the bendable area.’).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 10: The closest prior art (which has been made of record) fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination) a ratio of a depth of the outer pattern to a thickness of the support member is 60 % or more, and 70 % or less; and
a ratio of a depth of the inner pattern to the thickness of the support member is 30 % or more, and 40 % or less in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant. Thus, the Applicant’s claims are determined to be novel and non-obvious.
Zhou [0063] recites ‘the supporting layer 2 close to the outer side of bending or folding has a larger tensile deformation and has a higher requirement on the tensile performance, while the supporting layer 2 close to the inner side of bending or folding has a lower requirement on the tensile performance. In an implementation of the present application, the supporting layer 2 close to the outer side of bending or folding has a relatively larger area of the hollowed-out part(s) 20, while the supporting layer 2 close to the inner side of bending or folding has a relatively smaller area of the hollowed-out part(s) 20, so that the bending performance of the supporting layers 2 can not only be improved, but also the good support can be provided for the flexible display module 3 when the screen is unfolded’, however Zhou fails to specifically teach the ratio of depths as claimed
Liao (US 20220103670 A1) [0103] recites ‘Optionally, a proportion of the depth d of the gap 3 to the thickness of the support sheet 2 ranges from 77/80 to 97/100. For example, the thickness of the support sheet 2 is 0.08 mm, and the depth d of the gap 3 is 0.077 mm. For another example, the thickness of the support sheet 2 is 0.10 mm, and the depth d of the gap 3 is 0.097 mm’, however Liao fails to specifically teach two different ratios on two different sides. Also, neither of the two ratios fall within the claimed ranges.
Park (US 10694625 B2) col 13 lines 63-67 recites ‘When the openings 202 of FIG. 9E or 9F are formed to have a depth or length equal to the partial thickness P1, the thickness P1 needs to be greater than ½ of the thickness of the body 200a, which may be desirable in terms of stretching and contraction of the openings 202’
Wang (US 12093081 B2) claim 7 recites ‘a maximum thickness of the second support plate is H.sub.3, and a depth of each of the plurality of the blind hole is H.sub.4, and a value range of a ratio of the H.sub.4 to the H.sub.3 is between 0.4 and 0.5’, however Wang still fails to teach a ratio of a depth of a pattern on the other side between 60%-70%.
Xiong (US 11947396 B2) col 4 lines 41-44 recite ‘In some embodiments, the ratio of the depth of each of the blind holes 5 to the thickness of the support assembly 10 is in a range of ⅓ to ⅔, in order to further enhance the bending performance of the bending region.’ This matches half of claim 10, but Xiong still fails to teach a ratio of a depth of a pattern on the other side is in the opposite side of a range of ⅓ to ⅔. It might seem obvious to have a ratio of a depth of a pattern on the other side to be the same as on the first side, however claim 10 requires a different (and specific) ratio on one side from the other side.
Wang (US 20240081003 A1) [0128] recites ‘Furthermore, ratios of the depths of the plurality of groove structures 130 to a thickness of the supporting plate are less than or equal to 0.6’, see also fig 5. Wang has a similar situation with Xiong.
Wang (US 20250093908 A1) [0112] recites ‘In some embodiments, a ratio of the hole depth of the third hole group 700 to the thickness of the support plate 300 ranges from ½ to ⅔. Too large or too small ratio may lead to the imbalance between stress release performance and support rigidity, affect the performance parameters of the support plate 300, and lead to obvious creases’ and has a similar situation with Xiong.
Lin (US 20180209029 A1) fig 6, [0099] indicate a depth of groove 40%-60%, but fails to teach the remaining limitations similarly to Xiong,
Wang (US 20240045471 A1) have a similar situation.
Xiao (US 20240389429 A1) [0083] recites ‘Referring to FIGS. 3D and 4D, for example, in the direction from the inside to the outside with the first region G1 as the center, a ratio of the depth t3 of the first groove 22 to the thickness T of the support backplane, a ratio of the depth t2 of the second groove 22 to the thickness T of the support backplane, and a ratio of the depth t1 of the third groove 22 to the thickness T of the support backplane are 0.9, 0.7 and 0.5, respectively. That is, the depths of the plurality of grooves 22 in the first direction X are sequentially reduced from the inside to the outside.’
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular elements, columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are made moot by the new rejections as shown above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS R BURTNER whose telephone number is (571)272-0966. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Allen Parker can be reached on 303-297-4722. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DOUGLAS R BURTNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights